23 May, 2017

The strategy behind Washington’s destabilization of Venezuela

Venezuela
represents everything that the U.S. opposes in the region: socialism,
anti-imperialism, economic independence via energy exports and a
viable ally for China, Russia, Iran and other countries that oppose
the hegemonic designs of Washington.

by
Eric Draitser

Part
3 - Oil as a geopolitical weapon

However, it
would be a mistake to assume that U.S. policy toward Venezuela
revolves exclusively around the profits to be made by ExxonMobil and
other oil companies. While that is undoubtedly a factor, ultimately
it is about political leverage and strategy vis-à-vis rival powers
and power blocs.

Consider the
fact that Venezuela’s oil reserves alone account for roughly
one-quarter (24.8 percent) of all proven crude oil reserves within
the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). This makes
Venezuela hugely influential when it comes to decisions about oil
production and, consequently, global oil prices. And when you couple
Venezuela with Iran, a key ally of the Bolivarian Republic, both
countries together account for nearly 40 percent of OPEC crude. Add
to that non-OPEC member Russia, which accounts for 12.4 percent of
global crude production, just behind Saudi Arabia and the U.S., and
you begin to see just how significant these three countries are to
global oil prices and production.

One must
also consider Saudi Arabia, which closely trails Venezuela in terms
of proven crude reserves (22 percent of OPEC reserves). The
centrality of Venezuela should be immediately apparent. Installing a
right-wing, pro-U.S. government in Venezuela would mean that the U.S.
would effectively control, or at least have significant influence
over, nearly 85 percent of OPEC production (Venezuela and the Gulf
monarchies), thereby isolating Iran within the grouping. Put
differently, Venezuela is the only thing keeping OPEC from being a
plaything of Washington and Wall Street.

Russia and
China also figure centrally in this calculation. With Venezuela under
Washington’s boot, Moscow and Beijing would be significantly
weaker, as they would have no influence over OPEC. Nor would they be
able to satisfy each other’s needs alone – Russia needs consumer
goods and imports far beyond what China can provide, and China needs
energy and other raw materials far beyond what Russia can offer.

In effect,
regime change in Venezuela would cut the legs out from under Moscow
and Beijing.

An
instructive example can be found in Venezuela’s neighbor, Brazil.
An oil exporter almost as large as Venezuela in terms of production –
Brazil accounts for 3 percent of global crude production, while
Venezuela accounts for 3.1 percent – Brazil saw a quick political
transformation in the form of a coup against the
democratically-elected government of Dilma Rousseff, a coup that was
orchestrated by right-wing elements in the country and their backers
in the U.S.

And with the
takeover of the government by the right wing and Goldman Sachs,
Brazil’s oil exporting potential flipped overnight from a liability
to an asset for Washington and Wall Street. Trump and Tillerson seem
to have a similar vision for Venezuela.